The Lords Prayer and the Lockerbie Controversy

Are justice and forgiveness mutually exclusive?

“Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.”

For many who go to church every Sunday, these words roll off the tongue like a drop of dew on a morning leaf. Most of us don’t even think about the radical forgiveness we are committing ourselves to granting, every time we say the Lord’s Prayer. We acknowledge through the words we speak, however, that the forgiveness we receive from God is tied closely to the forgiveness we grant others. Nothing, I believe, can be tougher yet show more of God’s love than a true act of forgiveness. For that reason, it behooves me to add a slightly different, questioning voice to the debate raging over the recent decision by the Scottish government to release Abdel Al-Megrahi, a convicted terrorist, on grounds of compassion.

The news was splattered across every television screen and newspaper around the world, sending the blogosphere into a torrent of typing. Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi — a man convicted in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which killed 270 people over the small Scottish town of Lockerbie in 1988 — was heading home to Libya, a free yet dying man. And before Al-Megrahi even set foot on the tarmac of the Glasgow Airport in Scotland, the world’s ire was zeroing in on one man, Scottish Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill, who stood in front of the cameras and delivered a bold statement:

“It is my decision that Mr. Abdel Basset Mohamed Ali Al-Megrahi, convicted in 2001 for the Lockerbie bombing, now terminally ill with prostate cancer, be released on compassionate grounds and be allowed to return to Libya to die,” MacAskill said.

Criticism from politicians and family members

The criticism came quick and swift.

“The news today from Glasgow turned the word ‘compassion’ on its head. The bombing of Pan Am 103 was unforgivable,” Senator John Kerry said in a written statement.

“This man was convicted of murdering 270 people. He showed no compassion to them. They weren’t allowed to go home and die with their relatives in their own bed and I think this is a very bad decision,” said British Parliament leader David Cameron.

FBI Director Robert Mueller even weighed in through a letter he sent to Mr. MacAskill over the weekend.

“Your action makes a mockery of the grief of the families who lost their own on December 21, 1988,” he said. “Where, I ask, is the justice?”

Compassion should not be withheld on account of the expected actions of others. God calls us all to forgive. He calls us to love our enemies. He calls us to a radical conversion every day to grow closer to Him. The question is, how do we put that into practice?

Political anger paled in comparison to the fury expressed by many family members of loved ones on the doomed flight, who claimed this action brought back the immense pain they experienced two decades ago.

“It is like an undertow, a riptide of despair,” Maryland resident Rosemary Mild said. Her daughter, Miriam, died in the bombing. “I am a writer, and there are not enough adjectives to express my revulsion. This is a whole new kind of grief.”

Why can’t we forgive?

I don’t pretend to know what it is like to have lost a loved one in a heinous crime like the one that happened all those years ago in the skies over Scotland. But I also question what if anything would ever make the hurting stop. The pain of death stays with you forever. Its finality ensures there will never be a return to the way things once were. Keeping a dying man locked up would relieve as much pain, I would imagine, as keeping a chokehold on an unconscious assailant after you, the victim, were shot. The blood will still be running no matter what you do with your enemy.

This is to say nothing of Jesus’ command to “love thy enemy.” For this reason, I ask one question. Why can’t we forgive? Perhaps it is forgiveness that is the bandage we are looking for to stop the bleeding. And, if — and this is a big if — the decision to release Al-Megrahi was made solely on compassionate grounds, free of all potential trade deals, diplomatic wrangling, and politics in general, why can’t MacAskill’s actions be seen as a radical act of forgiveness? Are justice and forgiveness mutually exclusive?

Sure, it didn’t help his cause when news flashed around the world showing thousands of Libyans gathered on a tarmac to welcome the convicted bomber to his home country in what would be described broadly as a “hero’s welcome.” But that has more to do with an extremely distasteful lack of respect shown by the Libyan government toward family members of the victims… something MacAskill himself criticised. Compassion should not be withheld on account of the expected actions of others.

Does this mean we should simply release all prisoners once they are no longer deemed a threat? Not necessarily. But it should also not be ruled out.

God calls us all to forgive. He calls us to love our enemies. He calls us to a radical conversion every day to grow closer to Him. The question is, how do we put that into practice? How should I personally feel when confronted by stories of potentially unwarranted compassion? Is there even such a thing as unwarranted compassion?

Following God when it isn’t easy

Most prisoners are locked up out of compassion for the rest of society, fearing those convicts may hurt others if released. While possible, I find it hard to believe a man dying of cancer like Al-Megrahi would still try to hurt others, especially if he had received the compassion he failed to show toward the passengers of Flight 103.

So, does this mean we should simply release all prisoners once they are no longer deemed a threat? Not necessarily. But it should also not be ruled out. Isn’t the whole idea of parole, in effect, compassion in action?

And for all the insults one can hurl at MacAskill, you have to at least hand it to him; the man is brave. He made an immensely unpopular decision, doing what he believed to be right, and faced a tsunami of criticism head-on. As if the international hatred wasn’t enough, on Monday he had to explain his decision to a room full of skeptical members of his own country’s parliament.

I believe God calls us to follow Him not when it’s easy and convenient but, rather, when it’s hard and unpopular. And perhaps it’s in these times when the true test comes as to whether or not we can confidently say the Lord’s Prayer, knowing we live out every word.

The Author : Marc Adams
Marc Adams is a contributing editor at BustedHalo.com. He writes from Washington DC.
See more articles by Marc Adams (49).

Please note that the editorial staff reserves the right to not post comments it deems to be inappropriate and/or malicious in nature, as well as edit comments for length, clarity and fairness.

kellamd

All the pretty words are just telling us that Christ’s words are completely unuseable in real life.

Don Keane

I repeat: Kenny MacAskill’s decision was the ONLY one open to a Christian. I also repeat my remark about doubts regarding the extent of Mr Megrahi’s involvememt in the PanAm/Lockerbie bombing: are people in the US unaware of their government’s (and the IK government’s) obstruction of attempts to have various documents relating to the matter made public (including attempts by relatives of some of the victims of the bombing)?

patsw

The only person who can forgive is the one offended. The 270 victims cannot forgive their killer. What we the living can only do is apply imperfect justice and mercy in how we try, judge, and punish murderers. Imprisonment has several purposes: protection, deterrence, rehabilitation.

The early release of Megrahi is a great boost to the morale of terrorists and a signal that the West lacks the will to investigate, convict, and punish the guilty according to its own laws.

It can only set us up for another Lockerbie.

Third Age League

To forgive others is not a relative law, but absolute as a super-natural cause for receiving forgiveness. Not because it is arbitrary, but because it is within our nature that as long as we hold non-forgivingness and lack of charity in our heart, we hold judgement for ourselves. We are, then, incapable of receiving the gift of grace from God.

The dilemma, it seems, is this; We CAN NOT forgive all others!

However, it is the super-nature of the spiritual life that what man can not do, God can.

So the reliance upon God’s forgiveness relies on the absolute dependence on the power (which is love) from God to transform our anger,hatred, obtinancy and selfishness to super-natural virtues of love, freedom and charity.

In practice, how do we work with the spirit to cooperate to accomplish in act what is desired?

By looking at our own unremitting non-requitable need for the same forgiveness that we MUST provide for others. Honest self-searching and contrition and seeking ONLY mercy. Broken and emptied we become a channel for that mercy for the whole world.

Their are two aspects discussed here. The first addressed above is the spiritual good of the person.

The second is in regards to temporal social justice, of which, the Lord’s prayer does not speak. The social teaching depends on spiritual and practical prudence consistent with the good of the commonweal.

The desire of a minority for revenge is not a rightful cause of retribution. Again, owning only if this is not the good of the commonweal.

Each of us is dependent on all of us, and all of us is dependent on the spiritual unity of each person. Neither can act spiritually efficiently with out the other.

cathyf

There is also the special problem of terrorism, which is that terrorism is intended, by its practitioners, as an “evangelical” act. Terrorists do not kill people because they hate them, or because they want money or power, but because they are making a statement trying to convert those of us who witness the terrorism to their beliefs.

Osama bin Ladin explained quite publicly in the 1990′s that westerners had proven themselves weak by their response to terrorist attacks, and that weakness was proof that just a few more attacks and we would surrender.

To encourage those who use the tool of terrorism to think that they can succeed is manifestly evil.

Steve

I’m afraid I am going to have to disagree with this article. Forgiveness does not imply a remission of all penalties related to the act. For instance, if someone steals and seeks forgiveness, they generally have to give the money back. If a spouse is unfaithful and his/her partner forgives, it does not mean there are not serious consequences of the cheating, including distrust, disease, or an icy relationship.

It is perfectly consistent to lovingly forgive Mr. Megrahi but still desire punishment, punishment not out of revenge or retaliation, but for other justifiable reasons (setting an example to others, for instance).

After all, God will forgive the most heinous of acts, yet such forgiveness does not remit all punishment. If so, there would be no suffering here on earth or in purgatory.

Furthermore, I find it hard to swallow that Megrahi is not a threat just because he is terminally ill. He probably is, but who knows? The man is an unrepentant killer of 270 people who has served less than one month in prison for each of those deaths. I see no evidence that he is any less of a threat now than he was at any time after the bombing, aside from the fact that doctors say he’ll be dead soon. I pray that he repents of his actions.

Don Keane

Watching Kenny MacAskill on TV here in Scotland, making his announcement about Mr Megrahi made me proud to be a Scot. The decision was the only one open to a Christian, in all the circumstances of the case: including the fact that the extent of Mr Megrahi’s guilt for the Lockerbie bomb has always been in doubt. It’s easy for those not personally affected by the destruction of the PanAm aircraft to withhold compassion and forgiveness: it’s hard for those affected to extend these, and so they particularly are in need – not of the empty words of critical politicians – but of prayers that they may come to the day when they can extend compassion and forgiveness.